jay pettitt on 8/1/2006 at 00:20

---

Sweety, I'm not suggesting that you'll be a tyrant. I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't lead. I'm suggesting that no one person should be responsible for any one thing (including lead). It's my top secret recepie for keeping people motivated, in the loop, informed, involved and what-have-you. It also wards against feature creep, getting bogged down and lots of the other stuff can cause a project to drag and flop.

Trust me, it's a good thing.

If a bazillion and six people decide to join up, we'll need a structre. As is, we have a handfull. We can effectively be our own committee and fit into roles as and when. Frankly, that's an enjoyable freedom and a luxuary.

Consistancy will happen when we get together and agree on a project scope, followed by a story outline, followed by a bla bla bla. Because no one person will be responisble for a building a level, quality control is kept even as other team people review and give their various inputs.


If you've got time and energy right now - jump in and lead. Just don't expect me to hold you to it later, or sign anything.

Ziemanskye on 8/1/2006 at 00:29

---

The project lead can just be like the Talking Head.
They make the public announcements.
And they beat the team-members up with PMs and emails and generally keeps track of who's working and who has already done what.

I say it's an important (if a bit daunting) roll for even a small team.

Because it'd be a community thing though, people can just say no, or work on something else for a while, it's not (or shouldn't be) like a job with a strict deadline and pre-set goals and motivational speeches.

Also, the art consistancy might be more of a problem than you think. Most people build rooms taller than I do for example, and if you do it multipass you need that to match, and it's a bit hard to scale a room after the fact if the smeshes don't fit right

jay pettitt on 8/1/2006 at 00:56

---

Damn right I have.

I'm not underestimating consistancy anymore than anyone else. I just don't think a traditional leadership will supply it better than a written set of verily agreed agreements and a system where making is shared.

I'll concede to a leader (*whimper*) if everybody else concedes to a process of more than one person being involved in making individual levels/content items - ala agile programming. Sounds fair. :erm:

We ought to be able to plan a bit while contest 7 continues in the hope of being able to start making stuff as soon as possible after.

regarding splitting our resources into mappers/scripters/moddelers etc I think we should decide first if the project scope should include specifically being a vehicle for making and showcasing/distributing a bunch of new things (textures/models/ etc) or should the project focus on getting a campaign of fun levels out the door sooner rather than later and thus minimising the amount of new content. Or what.

Personally, for the sake of getting something out the door, I think we should limit ourselves as much as possible. If we have to, maybe produce 1 small texture pack, or 1 small smesh pack or something. There are always other projects.

ascottk on 8/1/2006 at 01:17

---

I agree traditional leadership won't work. Just someone to guide the way.



Someone suggested June as our dealine & that's a great dealine because I'm leaving for an Alaskan trip in June :D

I've been working on the Realist mod & we could that as our showcase (but easier on the FPS) . Also I'm getting better with texturing--as well as having better tools--so I could do a lot of texture work.

First we need a good story and maybe some concept art. We could use the default textures/smeshes as placeholders.

jay pettitt on 8/1/2006 at 01:22

---

I'd envision roughly vaguely 2 or 3 people working on a level so someone does architecture, then the other places ambient sounds or puts the AI in. With a bit of role swapping here and there. Or something.

...not like that game where someone draws a head then you fold the paper over and pass it on. (Though that could be fun)